[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 52 (Monday, March 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12845-12849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4940]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Notice of Opportunity for Comment on Model Safety Evaluation for
Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler To Provide Actions
for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable Using
the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model safety evaluation (SE)
relating to proposed changes to Actions in the Standard Technical
Specifications (STS) relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven
Auxiliary Feedwater / Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable.
This change would establish a Completion Time in the Standard Technical
Specifications for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine
driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor
driven AFW/EFW train. The NRC staff has also prepared a model
application and model no significant hazards consideration (NSHC)
determination relating to this matter. The purpose of these models is
to permit the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to
adopt the associated changes into plant-specific technical
specifications (TS). Licensees of nuclear power reactors to which the
models apply can request amendments confirming the applicability of the
SE and NSHC determination to their reactors. The NRC staff is
requesting comments on the Model SE, Model Application and Model NSHC
determination prior to announcing their availability for referencing in
license amendment applications.
DATES: The comment period expires 30 days from the date of this
publication. Comments received after this date will be considered if it
is practical to do so, but the Commission can only ensure consideration
for comments received on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted either electronically or via U.S.
mail.
To submit comments or questions on a proposed standard technical
specification change via the Internet, use Form for Sending Comments on
NRC Documents, then select Proposed Changes to Technical
Specifications. If you are commenting on a proposed change, please
match your comments with the correct proposed change by copying the
title of the proposed change from column one to the previous table into
the appropriate field of the comment form.
Submit written comments to: Chief, Rules and Directives Branch,
Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail
Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001.
Hand deliver comments to 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland,
between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.
Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC's Public
Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Trent L. Wertz, Technical
Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O-12H2, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone 301-415-
1568.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item
Improvement Process for Adopting Standard Technical Specification
Changes for Power Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The
consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to
improve the efficiency and transparency of NRC licensing processes.
This is accomplished by processing proposed changes to the Standard
Technical Specifications (STS) (NUREGs 1430--1434) in a manner that
supports subsequent license amendment applications. The CLIIP includes
an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the STS
following a preliminary assessment by the NRC staff and finding that
the change will likely be offered for adoption by licensees. The CLIIP
directs the NRC staff to evaluate any comments received for a proposed
change to the STS and to either reconsider the change or proceed with
announcing the availability of the change to licensees. Those licensees
opting to apply for the subject change to TS are responsible for
reviewing the NRC staff's evaluation, referencing the applicable
technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant specific
information. Each amendment application submitted in response to the
notice of availability would be processed and noticed in accordance
with applicable rules and NRC procedures.
This notice for comment involves establishing a Completion Time in
the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.7.5 of the STS for the
Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is
inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In
addition, this notice for comment involves changes to the STS that
establish specific Conditions and Action requirements for two motor
driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and for when the
turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one
inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one
inoperable steam supply. The changes were proposed by the Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF) in TSTF Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3,
which is accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html
(Accession No. ML070100363). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or
who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS,
should contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff by
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].
Applicability
This proposed change to adopt TSTF-412 is applicable to all
pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by
[[Page 12846]]
Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering
(CE). If approved, to efficiently process the incoming license
amendment applications, the NRC staff will request that each licensee
applying for the changes addressed by TSTF-412, Revision 3, use the
CLIIP to submit a License Amendment Request (LAR) that conforms to the
enclosed Model Application (Enclosure 1). Any deviations from the Model
Application should be explained in the licensee's submittal.
Significant deviations from the approach, or inclusion of additional
changes to the license, will result in staff rejection of the
submittal. Instead, licensees desiring significant variations and/or
additional changes should submit a LAR that does not claim to adopt
TSTF-412. Variations from the approach recommended in this notice may
require additional review by the NRC staff and may increase the time
and resources needed for the review.
Public Notices
This notice requests comments from interested members of the public
within 30 days of the date of publication in the Federal Register.
Following the NRC staff's evaluation of comments received as a result
of this notice, the NRC staff may reconsider the proposed change or may
proceed with announcing the availability of the change in a subsequent
notice (perhaps with some changes to the SE or proposed NSHC
determination as a result of public comments).
If the NRC staff announces the availability of the change,
licensees wishing to adopt the change will submit an application in
accordance with applicable rules and other regulatory requirements. The
NRC staff will in turn issue for each application a notice of proposed
action, which includes a proposed NSHC determination. A notice of
issuance of an amendment of operating license will also be issued to
announce the adoption of TSTF-412 for each plant that applies for and
receives the requested change.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of March, 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy J. Kobetz,
Chief, Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and
Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Attachment:
The following example of a license amendment request (LAR) was
prepared by the NRC staff to facilitate the adoption of Technical
Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3
``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW
Pump Inoperable.'' The model provides the expected level of detail
and content for a LAR to adopt TSTF-412, Revision 3. Licensees
remain responsible for ensuring that their plant-specific LAR
fulfills their administrative requirements as well as NRC
regulations.
Proposed Model License Amendment Request
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Document Control Desk,
Washington, DC 20555.
Subject: Plant Name
Docket No. 50--Application for Technical Specification
Improvement To Revise Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven
Auxiliary Feedwater/Emergency Feedwater Pump Inoperable Using the
Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process
Gentlemen:
In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90 of Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [LICENSEE] is submitting a
request for an amendment to the technical specifications (TS) for
[PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.].
The proposed amendment establishes Conditions, Required Actions,
and Completion Times in the Standard Technical Specifications (STS)
for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven
Auxiliary Feedwater/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) pump is inoperable
concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. In
addition, this amendment establishes changes to the STS that
establish specific Actions when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains are
inoperable at the same time and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is
inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or
(b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The
change is consistent with NRC-approved Technical Specification Task
Force (TSTF) Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for
One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The
availability of this technical specification improvement was
announced in the Federal Register on [DATE OF NOTICE OF
AVAILABILITY] as part of the consolidated line item improvement
process (CLIIP).
Enclosure 1 provides a description of the proposed change and
confirmation of applicability.
Enclosure 2 provides the existing TS pages marked-up to show the
proposed change.
Enclosure 3 provides the existing TS Bases pages marked-up to
reflect the proposed change.
There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this
proposed change.
[LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed license amendment
by [DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X
DAYS].
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this application,
with enclosures, is being provided to the designated [STATE]
Official.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United
States of America that I am authorized by [LICENSEE] to make this
request and that the foregoing is true and correct. [Note that
request may be notarized in lieu of using this oath or affirmation
statement].
If you should have any questions regarding this submittal,
please contact [ ].
Sincerely,
Name, Title
Enclosures:
1. Description and Assessment
2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes
3. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes
cc:
NRR Project Manager
Regional Office
Resident Inspector
State Contact
Enclosure 1 to Model License Amendment Request
Description and Assessment
1.0 Description
The proposed License amendment establishes a new Completion Time
in Standard Technical Specifications Section [3.7.5] where one steam
supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent
with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train. This amendment also
establishes specific Conditions and Action requirements when two
motor driven AFW/EFW trains are inoperable at the same time and the
turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to
one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one
inoperable steam supply.
The changes are consistent with NRC approved Industry/Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification
Change Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One
Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable.'' The
availability of this technical specification improvement was
announced in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part
of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP).
2.0 Assessment
2.1 Applicability of Published Safety Evaluation
[LICENSEE] has reviewed the safety evaluation published on
[DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. This verification
included a review of the NRC staff's evaluation as well as the
supporting information provided to support TSTF-412, Revision 3.
[LICENSEE] has concluded that the justifications presented in the
TSTF proposal and the safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff
are applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NOS.] and justify this amendment for
the incorporation of the changes to the [PLANT] Technical
Specifications.
2.2 Optional Changes and Variations
[LICENSEE] is not proposing any variations or deviations from
the technical specification changes described in TSTF-412, Revision
3, or the NRC staff's model safety evaluation published in the
Federal Register on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]).
[[Page 12847]]
3.0 Regulatory Analysis
3.1 No Significant Hazards Determination
[LICENSEE] has reviewed the proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination published on [DATE] as part of the
CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the proposed determination
presented in the notice is applicable to [PLANT] and the
determination is hereby incorporated by reference to satisfy the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(a).
3.2 Verification and Commitments
There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this
proposed change.
4.0 Environmental Evaluation
[LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental evaluation included in
the model safety evaluation published in the Federal Register on
[DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]) as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has
concluded that the NRC staff's findings presented in that evaluation
are applicable to [PLANT] and the evaluation is hereby incorporated
by reference for this application.
Enclosure 2 to Model License Amendment Request: Proposed Technical
Specification Changes
Enclosure 3 to Model License Amendment Request: Changes To TS Bases
Pages
Proposed Model Safety Evaluation
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Consolidated Line Item Improvement
Technical Specification Task Force Traveler TSTF-412, Revision
3, Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to the Turbine Driven AFW/
EFW Pump Inoperable
1.0 Introduction
By application dated [DATE], [LICENSEE NAME] (the licensee),
submitted a request for changes to the [PLANT NAME], Technical
Specifications (TS) (Agencywide Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Accession No. [MLxxxxxxxxx]). The requested change
would establish a Completion Time for the Condition where one steam
supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump is inoperable concurrent
with an inoperable motor driven AFW/EFW train and establish specific
Conditions and Required Actions when two motor driven AFW/EFW trains
are inoperable at the same time and the turbine driven AFW/EFW train
is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply,
or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply.
These changes were described in a Notice of Availability
published in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]).
2.0 Regulatory Evaluation
In 10 CFR 50.36, the Commission established its regulatory
requirements related to the content of Technical Specifications
(TS). Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(c), TS are required to include items
in the following categories: (1) safety limits, limiting safety
system settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting
conditions for operation (LCOs); (3) surveillance requirements
(SRs); (4) design features; and (5) administrative controls. The
rule does not specify the particular requirements to be included in
a plant's TS.
3.0 Technical Evaluation
TS 3.7.5, Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW)/Emergency Feedwater (EFW)
System
The AFW/EFW System is designed to automatically supply
sufficient water to the steam generator(s) to remove decay heat upon
the loss of normal feedwater supply with steam generator pressure at
the set point of the Main Steam Safety Valves (MSSVs). Subsequently,
the AFW/EFW System supplies sufficient water to cool the unit to
Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System entry conditions, with steam
being released through the Atmospheric Dump Valves (ADVs).
AFW/EFW Systems typically consist of two motor driven AFW/EFW
pumps and one steam turbine driven pump configured into three
trains. The capacity of the motor driven and steam driven AFW/EFW
pumps can vary by plant. Motor driven pumps typically provide 50% or
100% of the required AFW/EFW flow capacity as assumed in the
accident analysis. Motor driven AFW/EFW pumps are typically powered
from an independent Class 1E power supply and each pump train
typically feeds half of the steam generators, although each pump has
the capability to be realigned from the control room to feed other
steam generators. The steam turbine driven AFW/EFW pump provides
either 100% or 200% of the required capacity to all steam
generators. The steam turbine driven pump receives steam from two
main steam lines upstream of the main steam isolation valves. Each
of the steam feed lines will supply 100% of the requirements of the
turbine driven AFW/EFW pump.
LCO 3.7.5, Condition A (as Proposed)
Condition A is modified to refer to the inoperability of a
turbine driven AFW/EFW train due to an inoperable steam supply,
instead of referring to the inoperability of a turbine driven AFW/
EFW pump. This change is being proposed in order to make Condition A
train oriented instead of component oriented, consistent with the
other Conditions that are included in STS 3.7.5. The train oriented
approach is consistent with the preferred approach that is generally
reflected in the STS, and therefore the proposed change is
considered to be acceptable.
STS 3.7.5, Condition C (as Proposed)
A new Condition C with two possible Required Actions (C.1 OR
C.2) is proposed for the turbine driven AFW/EFW train being
inoperable due to one inoperable steam supply and one motor driven
AFW/EFW train being inoperable at the same time. Required Action C.1
requires restoration of the affected steam supply to operable status
within either 24 or 48 hours, depending on the capability of the
motor driven AFW/EFW train that remains operable. Alternatively,
Required Action C.2 requires restoration of the inoperable motor
driven AFW/EFW train within either 24 or 48 hours, again depending
on the capability of the motor driven AFW/EFW train that remains
operable. New Condition C provides two proposed Completion Times
that are dependent upon the capacity of the remaining operable motor
driven AFW/EFW train to provide AFW/EFW to the steam generators.
A proposed 24 hour Completion Time is applicable to plants that
may provide insufficient flow to the steam generators (SGs) in
accordance with accident analyses assumptions if a main steam line
break (MSLB) or feedwater line break (FLB) were to occur that
renders the remaining steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW
pump inoperable (a concurrent single failure is not assumed).
Insufficient feedwater flow could result, for example, if a single
motor driven AFW/EFW train does not have sufficient capacity to
satisfy accident analyses assumptions, or if the operable pump is
feeding the faulted SG (i.e. the SG that is aligned to the operable
steam supply for the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump). [This would
typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor driven pump having
less than 100% of the required flow.] Likewise, a proposed 48 hour
Completion Time is applicable when the remaining operable motor
driven AFW/EFW train is capable of providing sufficient feedwater
flow in accordance with accident analyses assumptions. [This would
typically apply to plants with each AFW/EFW motor driven pump having
greater than or equal to 100% of the required flow.]
The STS typically allows a 72 hour Completion Time for
Conditions where the remaining operable equipment is able to
mitigate postulated accidents without assuming a concurrent single
active failure. In this particular case, a 24 hour Completion Time
is proposed for the situation where the AFW/EFW system would be able
to perform its function for most postulated events, and would only
be challenged by a MSLB or FLB that renders the remaining operable
steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump inoperable.
Additionally, depending on the capacity of the operable motor driven
AFW/EFW pump, it may be able to mitigate MSLB and FLB accidents
during those instances when it is not aligned to the faulted SG. The
selection of 24 hours for the Completion Time is based on the
remaining operable steam supply to the turbine driven AFW/EFW pump
and the continued functionality of the turbine driven AFW/EFW train,
the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train, and the low
likelihood of an event occurring during this 24 hour period that
would challenge the capability of the AFW/EFW system to provide
feedwater to the SGs. The proposed Completion Time for this
particular situation is consistent with what was approved for
Waterford 3 by License Amendment 173 for a similar Condition (ADAMS
Accession No. ML012840538), and it is commensurate with the STS in
that the proposed Completion Time is much less than the 72 hours
that is allowed for the situation where accident mitigation
capability is maintained. Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the
[[Page 12848]]
proposed 24 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this particular
situation.
A 48 hour Completion Time is proposed for the situation where
the remaining operable motor driven AFW/EFW train is able to
mitigate postulated accidents in accordance with accident analyses
assumptions without assuming a concurrent single active failure. The
selection of 48 hours is based on the continued capability of the
AFW/EFW system to perform its function, while at the same time
recognizing that this Condition represents a higher level of
degradation than one inoperable AFW/EFW train which is currently
allowed for up to 72 hours by STS 3.7.5. The proposed 48 hour
Completion Time represents an appropriate balance between the more
severe 24 hour situation discussed in the previous paragraph and the
less severe Condition that is afforded a 72 hour Completion Time by
the current STS. Therefore, the NRC staff agrees that the proposed
48 hour Completion Time is acceptable for this particular situation.
STS 3.7.5, Condition D (as Proposed)
The current Condition C is renamed as Condition D. This
Condition has been modified to incorporate changes brought on by the
addition of new Condition C. The first Condition has been modified
and now applies to the situation where the Required Action and
associated Completion Time of Condition A, B, or C are not met. This
section of Condition D is modified to also apply to the new
Condition C when the Completion Time that is specified for new
Condition C is not met. The NRC staff considers this to be
appropriate and consistent with existing STS 3.7.5 requirements to
place the plant in a mode where the Condition does not apply when
the Required Actions are not met.
The second Condition following the first ``OR'' in Condition D
is modified from ``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or
3'' to ``Two AFW/EFW trains inoperable in MODE 1, 2, or 3 for
reasons other than Condition C.'' This change is necessary to
recognize the situation specified by Condition C (as proposed) where
one motor driven AFW/EFW train is allowed to be inoperable at the
same time that the turbine driven AFW/EFW train is inoperable due to
an inoperable steam supply to the pump turbine. Therefore, the NRC
staff considers the proposed change to be acceptable.
The Required Actions associated with this Condition were renamed
from C.1 AND C.2 to D.1 AND D.2 but not otherwise changed. Required
Action D.1 requires the plant to be in Mode 3 in 6 hours, and
Required Action D.2 requires the plant to be in Mode 4 in 18 hours.
This change is purely editorial as no other changes are involved.
Therefore, this proposed change is acceptable.
STS 3.7.5, Condition E (as Proposed)
Because current Condition C is renamed as Condition D, current
Condition D is renamed as Condition E. This change is purely
editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed
change is acceptable.
STS 3.7.5, Condition F (as Proposed)
Because current Condition D is renamed as Condition E, current
Condition E is renamed as Condition F. This change is purely
editorial as no other changes are involved. Therefore, the proposed
change is acceptable.
STS 3.7.5 Bases (as Proposed)
Though changes to the STS Bases do not require NRC approval per
se, changes to the STS Bases were reviewed to assess their
consistency with the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5. The proposed
changes to the STS Bases appeared to be consistent with the proposed
changes to STS 3.7.5.
4.0 State Consultation
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the [STATE]
State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the
amendments. The State official had [(1) no comments or (2) the
following comments--with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff].
5.0 Environmental Consideration
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the
installation or use of a facility component located within the
restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes
surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the
amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts and no
significant change in the types of any effluents that may be
released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The
Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the
amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there
has been [(1) no public comment on such finding (2) the following
comments with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff ([xx FR xxxxx,
DATE]). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria
for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant
to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or
environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the
issuance of the amendment.
6.0 Conclusion
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations
discussed above, that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the
health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation
in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in
compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance
of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and
security or to the health and safety of the public.
The proposed changes are consistent with NRC practices and
policies as generally reflected in the STS and as reflected by
applicable precedents that have been approved. Therefore, the NRC
staff has determined that the proposed changes to STS 3.7.5 should
be approved.
Model No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination
Description of amendment request: The requested change,
applicable to all pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by
Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Westinghouse, and Combustion Engineering
(CE), would provide changes to the Actions in the Standard Technical
Specifications (STS) relating to One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven
Auxiliary Feedwater/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) Pump Inoperable.
The proposed change is described in Technical Specification Task
Force (TSTF) Standard TS Change Traveler TSTF-412, Revision 3, and
was described in the Notice of Availability published in the Federal
Register on [DATE] ([xx FR xxxxx]).
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an analysis of the
issue of no significant hazards consideration is presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The Auxiliary/Emergency Feedwater (AFW/EFW) System is not an
initiator of any design basis accident or event, and therefore the
proposed changes do not increase the probability of any accident
previously evaluated. The proposed changes to address the condition
of one or two motor driven AFW/EFW trains inoperable and the turbine
driven AFW/EFW train inoperable due to one steam supply inoperable
do not change the response of the plant to any accidents.
The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators
or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, and
configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is
operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not adversely
affect the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to
perform their intended safety function to mitigate the consequences
of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The
proposed changes do not affect the source term, containment
isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating
the radiological consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
Further, the proposed changes do not increase the types and amounts
of radioactive effluent that may be released offsite, nor
significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational/public
radiation exposures.
Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of any accident previously
evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not result in a change in the manner in
which the AFW/EFW System provides plant protection. The AFW/EFW
System will continue to supply water to the steam generators to
remove decay heat and other residual heat by delivering at least the
minimum required flow rate to the steam generators. There are no
design changes associated with the proposed changes. The changes to
the Conditions and Required Actions do not change any existing
accident scenarios, nor create any new or different accident
scenarios.
[[Page 12849]]
The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant
(i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a
change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition,
the changes do not impose any new or different requirements or
eliminate any existing requirements. The changes do not alter
assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are
consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant
operating practice.
Therefore, the changes do not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not alter the manner in which safety
limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for
operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria
are not impacted by these changes. The proposed changes will not
result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design
basis.
Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not
involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Based on the above, the proposed change involves no significant
hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR
50.92(c), and accordingly, a finding of no significant hazards
consideration is justified.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this XXth day of XX, 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Project Manager,
Plant Licensing Branch [ ], Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-4940 Filed 3-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P